Rajesh Bindal, J. - (1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the order dated 27.5.2001 passed by respondent no. 2 vide which the petitioner was prematurely retired from service.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Constable on 29.6.1972. Thereafter, he was promoted as upgraded constable on 15.7.1999. He was issued a show cause notice for premature retirement on 5.10.2000 and thereafter by passing the impugned order dated 27.5.2001, the petitioner was prematurely retired from service. While challenging the order, the submission is that the punishment earlier imposed or the entries in the ACRs loose their significance after promotion is granted to an employee. As the petitioner was promoted as upgraded Constable on 15.7.1999, his service record prior thereto could not be considered for the purpose of premature retirement. He further submitted that though in the reply the stand has been taken by the respondents that the petitioner was reverted to the rank of Constable vide order dated 6.9.2000, however, the same was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and further a copy thereof has never been supplied to him. It was further submitted that the impugned order is totally arbitrary and nonspeaking.
(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that in terms of Rule 9.18 (2) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, as amended by Haryana Government (Haryana Second Amendment) Rules, 1973 (for short, 'the Rules'), police official can be compulsory retired after completion of 25 years of service. Considering the consistent bad record of the petitioner where he had been inflicted punishment of stoppage of 18 increments with cumulative effect at different times, it was found that the continuance of the petitioner in service was not in public interest, hence, he was prematurely retired, sanction of which was taken in advance from the Government. It is wrong to state that the petitioner was promoted as Head Constable as he was merely designated as upgraded Constable. The same is given to constables after a specific length of service, who are not able to qualify the requisite test. When it was found that as per the record of the petitioner, he was not entitled to that benefit, the same was withdrawn on 6.9.2000. Even if the contention of the petitioner is taken on its face value that copy of the order was not served upon him, but still he has pleaded regarding this fact in the writ petition and further even after filing of reply by the State, no steps have been taken by him to challenge the same.;